CHALLENGES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF TEETH WITH EXTENSIVE STRUCTURAL LOSS AFTER ENDODONTIC TREATMENT

Authors

  • Eduardo Loures Filho
  • Hellen Karina Silva de Mendonça
  • Maria Luisa Silva de Melo
  • Fabiana Oliveira Carvalho
  • Rafaela Mariana Fontes de Bragança
  • Amanda Cypriano Alves
  • Giulia Dias Ribeiro

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56238/isevmjv5n2-034

Keywords:

Endodontically Treated Teeth, Intraradicular Posts, Fiber Glass Posts, Endocrowns, Structural Loss

Abstract

Endodontically treated teeth present increased susceptibility to fracture, mainly due to the loss of dental structure and associated biomechanical changes. The restorative management of these teeth, especially when there is extensive structural compromise, represents a significant clinical challenge and requires an evidence-based approach. The present study aimed to analyze, through a narrative literature review, the main restorative strategies and biomechanical factors involved in the rehabilitation of teeth with severe structural loss after endodontic treatment. The databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were consulted, including studies published between 2021 and 2025, such as clinical trials, systematic reviews, and laboratory studies. The findings indicate that the amount of remaining dental structure is the primary determinant of restorative success. The presence of a ferrule is associated with greater fracture resistance, while intraradicular posts play a fundamental role in core retention without providing significant structural reinforcement. Fiber glass posts exhibit more favorable biomechanical behavior, with better stress distribution and a lower incidence of irreparable fractures. Additionally, endocrowns have shown to be a conservative and effective alternative, with performance comparable to conventional restorations in selected cases. It is concluded that the success of restorative treatment depends on individualized planning, maximum preservation of dental structure, and appropriate selection of technique and materials, favoring minimally invasive approaches and greater clinical longevity.

References

Alenezi, A. A., et al. (2024). Clinical behavior and survival of endodontically treated teeth with or without post placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Oral Science, 66(4), 207–214.

Mously, H. A., et al. (2025). Anterior endocrowns as an alternative to core crown restorations: a systematic review. International Dental Journal, 75, 59–74.

Popescu, A. D., et al. (2022). Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated canines: a finite element analysis study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15), 8928.

Shereef, M., et al. (2021). Comparison of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with different aesthetic post and core systems under all ceramic restoration luted with two types of cements. Original Research.

Spicciarelli, V., et al. (2021). Influence of remaining tooth substance and post-endodontic restoration on fracture strength of endodontically treated maxillary incisors. Dental Materials Journal, 40(3), 697–703.

Downloads

Published

2026-04-14

How to Cite

CHALLENGES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF TEETH WITH EXTENSIVE STRUCTURAL LOSS AFTER ENDODONTIC TREATMENT. (2026). International Seven Journal of Multidisciplinary, 5(2), e9923. https://doi.org/10.56238/isevmjv5n2-034